Five business leaders you should know

Fredrick Herzberg, Steven Covey, Malcolm Gladwell, Napoleon Hill and Charles Handy.

It is difficult to narrow the choice down to just 5 individuals, but I have chosen Fredrick Herzberg, Steven Covey, Malcolm Gladwell, Napoleon Hill and Charles Handy as the most significant mainly because of the influence they have had on others and because of their timeless relevance.

Herzberg I believe has had the most significant impact on organisations’ approach to motivating their staff and indeed his concepts are as relevant now as they were over 50 years ago. Nowadays we hear a lot about employee engagement and this is pure application of Herzberg’s principles and a recognition that those who feel more part of an enterprise and who have more control over their work are likely to perform better and make a bigger contribution.

Like Herzberg, Napoleon Hill is another business thinker who continues to have a great relevance to contemporary business life and it is easy to spot the influence he has had on others such as Covey  and Bandler and Grinder’s work on NLP.  The psychology of intention and outcome is fascinating and many successful entrepreneurs and business leaders have recognised their achievements have resulted through applying the right mixture of desire, hard work, visioning and tenacity. His principles are applicable to people at all levels and not just the aspiring Richard Branson’s of the world. Fundamentally they can help anyone to fulfil their potential if they know what drives them and what they want in life and if they are prepared to work hard for it.

As a journalist, Malcolm Gladwell’s is an observer rather than a theoretician but nonetheless, many of his observations especially in his books ‘Blink’ and ‘Tipping Point’ are having a significant influence on business thinking in the C21st. Tipping point provides a robust and practical guide to building brands and creating recognition in a world where there is exponential growth in the competition for attention. Blink highlights the importance of authenticity of leaders in business and the need for behaviour to be linked to beliefs and values.

Stephen Covey’s work ‘Seven Habits of Highly Effective people’ has created a universal framework for much of today’s senior management and leadership development. Although criticised by some as pure common sense, Covey’s work has provided millions of people with a roadmap which reminds us that excellence and success is not an act but a habit.

Charles Handy has been an important figure in how we view work and our relationship with employers and his publication the ‘Future of Work’ was prophetic. Employment no longer means joining a company for life and the relationship between employer and employee has become economic rather than paternalistic. People now need to manage their own careers and there are no jobs for life. Some feel this is a step backwards but Handy’s concept of Portfolio Careers argues that this creates opportunity for people to take more control of their destiny and fulfil more rewarding careers whilst organisations benefit through having a more flexible workforce which can adapt quicker to change.  

John Maxted, founder of international HR consultancy Digby Morgan (which he sold in 2011) is a consultant and non-executive director. He is a contributor to Business Gurus, published by Crimson Publishing, www.crimsonbooks.co.uk

Malcolm Gladwell, Photograph: Getty Images

John Maxted, founder of international HR consultancy Digby Morgan (which he sold in 2011) is a consultant and non-executive director. He is a contributor to Business Gurus, published by Crimson Publishing.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

There are risks as well as opportunities ahead for George Osborne

The Chancellor is in a tight spot, but expect his political wiles to be on full display, says Spencer Thompson.

The most significant fiscal event of this parliament will take place in late November, when the Chancellor presents the spending review setting out his plans for funding government departments over the next four years. This week, across Whitehall and up and down the country, ministers, lobbyists, advocacy groups and town halls are busily finalising their pitches ahead of Friday’s deadline for submissions to the review

It is difficult to overstate the challenge faced by the Chancellor. Under his current spending forecast and planned protections for the NHS, schools, defence and international aid spending, other areas of government will need to be cut by 16.4 per cent in real terms between 2015/16 and 2019/20. Focusing on services spending outside of protected areas, the cumulative cut will reach 26.5 per cent. Despite this, the Chancellor nonetheless has significant room for manoeuvre.

Firstly, under plans unveiled at the budget, the government intends to expand capital investment significantly in both 2018-19 and 2019-20. Over the last parliament capital spending was cut by around a quarter, but between now and 2019-20 it will grow by almost 20 per cent. How this growth in spending should be distributed across departments and between investment projects should be at the heart of the spending review.

In a paper published on Monday, we highlighted three urgent priorities for any additional capital spending: re-balancing transport investment away from London and the greater South East towards the North of England, a £2bn per year boost in public spending on housebuilding, and £1bn of extra investment per year in energy efficiency improvements for fuel-poor households.

Secondly, despite the tough fiscal environment, the Chancellor has the scope to fund a range of areas of policy in dire need of extra resources. These include social care, where rising costs at a time of falling resources are set to generate a severe funding squeeze for local government, 16-19 education, where many 6th-form and FE colleges are at risk of great financial difficulty, and funding a guaranteed paid job for young people in long-term unemployment. Our paper suggests a range of options for how to put these and other areas of policy on a sustainable funding footing.

There is a political angle to this as well. The Conservatives are keen to be seen as a party representing all working people, as shown by the "blue-collar Conservatism" agenda. In addition, the spending review offers the Conservative party the opportunity to return to ‘Compassionate Conservatism’ as a going concern.  If they are truly serious about being seen in this light, this should be reflected in a social investment agenda pursued through the spending review that promotes employment and secures a future for public services outside the NHS and schools.

This will come at a cost, however. In our paper, we show how the Chancellor could fund our package of proposed policies without increasing the pain on other areas of government, while remaining consistent with the government’s fiscal rules that require him to reach a surplus on overall government borrowing by 2019-20. We do not agree that the Government needs to reach a surplus in that year. But given this target wont be scrapped ahead of the spending review, we suggest that he should target a slightly lower surplus in 2019/20 of £7bn, with the deficit the year before being £2bn higher. In addition, we propose several revenue-raising measures in line with recent government tax policy that together would unlock an additional £5bn of resource for government departments.

Make no mistake, this will be a tough settlement for government departments and for public services. But the Chancellor does have a range of options open as he plans the upcoming spending review. Expect his reputation as a highly political Chancellor to be on full display.

Spencer Thompson is economic analyst at IPPR